Dataset Information

Survival following early-stage colon cancer: an ACCENT-based comparison of patients versus a matched international general population†.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Post-treatment survival experience of early colon cancer (CC) patients is well described in the literature, which states that cure is probable for some patients. However, comparisons of treated patients' survival versus that expected from a matched general population (MGP) are limited.

Patients and methods

A total of 32 745 patients from 25 randomized adjuvant trials conducted from 1977 to 2012 in 41 countries were pooled. Observed long-term survival of these patients was compared with expected survival matched on sex, age, country, and year, both overall and by stage (II and III), sex, treatment [surgery, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), 5-FU + oxaliplatin], age (<70 and 70+), enrollment year (pre/post 2000), and recurrence (yes/no). Comparisons were made at randomization and repeated conditional on survival to 1, 2, 3, and 5 years. CC and MGP equivalence was tested, and observed Kaplan-Meier survival rates compared with expected MGP rates 3 years out from each landmark. Analyses were also repeated in patients without recurrence.

Results

Within most cohorts, long-term survival of CC patients remained statistically worse than the MGP, though conditional survival generally improved over time. Among those surviving 5 years, stage II, oxaliplatin-treated, elderly, and recurrence-free patients achieved subsequent 3-year survival rates within 5% of the MGP, with recurrence-free patients achieving equivalence.

Conclusions

Conditional on survival to 5 years, long-term survival of most CC patients on clinical trials remains modestly poorer than an MGP, but achieves MGP levels in some subgroups. These findings emphasize the need for access to quality care and improved treatment and follow-up strategies.

SUBMITTER: Renfro LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4405281 | biostudies-literature | 2015 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Survival following early-stage colon cancer: an ACCENT-based comparison of patients versus a matched international general population†.

Renfro L A LA Grothey A A Kerr D D Haller D G DG André T T Van Cutsem E E Saltz L L Labianca R R Loprinzi C L CL Alberts S R SR Schmoll H H Twelves C C Yothers G G Sargent D J DJ

Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 20150219 5

<h4>Background</h4>Post-treatment survival experience of early colon cancer (CC) patients is well described in the literature, which states that cure is probable for some patients. However, comparisons of treated patients' survival versus that expected from a matched general population (MGP) are limited.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>A total of 32 745 patients from 25 randomized adjuvant trials conducted from 1977 to 2012 in 41 countries were pooled. Observed long-term survival of these patients w ...[more]

PMID: 25697217

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundColon cancer (CC) incidence in young adults (age 20-49 years), termed early-onset CC (EO-CC), is increasing.MethodsIndividual patient data on 35 713 subjects with stage III colon cancer from 25 randomized studies in the Adjuvant Colon Cancer ENdpoint database were pooled. The distributions of demographics, clinicopathological features, biomarker status, and outcome data were summarized by age group. Overall survival, disease-free survival, time to recurrence, and survival after recurrence were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox models stratified by treatment arms within studies, adjusting for sex, race, body mass index, performance status, disease stage, grade, risk group, number of lymph nodes examined, disease sidedness, and molecular markers. All statistical tests were 2-sided.ResultsUsing a 5% difference between age groups as the clinically meaningful cutoff, patients with stage III EO-CC had similar sex, race, performance status, risk group, tumor sidedness, and T stage compared with patients with late-onset CC (age 50 years and older). EO-CC patients were less likely to be overweight (30.2% vs 36.2%) and more commonly had 12 or more lymph nodes resected (69.5% vs 58.7%). EO-CC tumors were more frequently mismatch repair deficient (16.4% vs 11.5%) and less likely to have BRAFV600E (5.6% vs 14.0%), suggesting a higher rate of Lynch syndrome in EO-CC. Patients with EO-CC had statistically significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74 to 0.89; P < .001), disease-free survival (HR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.98; P = .01), and survival after recurrence (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.80 to 0.97; P = .008) in the analysis without molecular markers; however, age at onset of CC lost its prognostic value when outcome was adjusted for molecular markers.ConclusionTumor biology was found to be a more important prognostic factor than age of onset among stage III colon cancer patients in the Adjuvant Colon Cancer ENdpoint database.

Project description:BackgroundAmong patients with resected colon cancer, black patients have worse survival than whites. We investigated whether disparities in survival and related endpoints would persist when patients were treated with identical therapies in controlled clinical trials.MethodsWe assessed 14,611 patients (1218 black and 13,393 white) who received standardized adjuvant treatment in 12 randomized controlled clinical trials conducted in North America for resected stage II and stage III colon cancer between 1977 and 2002. Individual patient data on covariates and outcomes were extracted from the Adjuvant Colon Cancer ENdpoinTs (ACCENT) database. The endpoints examined in this meta-analysis were overall survival (time to death), recurrence-free survival (time to recurrence or death), and recurrence-free interval (time to recurrence). Cox models were stratified by study and controlled for sex, stage, age, and treatment to determine the effect of race. Kaplan-Meier estimates were adjusted for similar covariates to control for confounding. All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsBlack patients were younger than whites (median age, 58 vs 61 years, respectively; P < .001) and more likely to be female (55% vs 45%, respectively; P < .001). Overall survival was worse in black patients than whites (hazard ratio [HR] of death = 1.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.11 to 1.34, P < .001). Five-year overall survival rates for blacks and whites were 68.2% and 72.8%, respectively. When subsets defined by sex, stage, and age were analyzed, overall survival was consistently worse in black patients. Recurrence-free survival was worse in black patients than whites (HR of recurrence or death = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.24, P = .0045). Three-year recurrence-free survival rates in blacks and whites were 68.4% and 72.1%, respectively. In contrast, recurrence-free interval was similar in black and white patients (HR of recurrence = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.97 to 1.19, P = .15). Three-year recurrence-free interval rates in blacks and whites were 71.3% and 74.2%, respectively.ConclusionsBlack patients with resected stage II and stage III colon cancer who were treated with the same therapy as white patients experienced worse overall and recurrence-free survival, but similar recurrence-free interval, compared with white patients. The differences in survival may be mostly because of factors unrelated to the patients' adjuvant colon cancer treatment.

Project description:BackgroundColon cancer in older patients represents a major public health issue. As older patients are hardly included in clinical trials, the optimal treatment of these patients remains unclear. The present international EURECCA comparison explores possible associations between treatment and survival outcomes in elderly colon cancer patients.Subjects, materials, and methodsNational data from Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden were obtained, as well as a multicenter surgery cohort from Germany. Patients aged 80 years and older, diagnosed with colon cancer between 2001 and 2010, were included. The study interval was divided into two periods: 2001-2006 and 2007-2010. The proportion of surgical treatment and chemotherapy within a country and its relation to relative survival were calculated for each time frame.ResultsOverall, 50,761 patients were included. At least 94% of patients with stage II and III colon cancer underwent surgical removal of the tumor. For stage II-IV, the proportion of chemotherapy after surgery was highest in Belgium and lowest in The Netherlands and Norway. For stage III, it varied from 24.8% in Belgium and 3.9% in Norway. For stage III, a better adjusted relative survival between 2007 and 2010 was observed in Sweden (adjusted relative excess risk [RER] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-0.76) and Norway (adjusted RER 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69-0.96) compared with Belgium.ConclusionThere is substantial variation in the rate of treatment and survival between countries for patients with colon cancer aged 80 years or older. Despite higher prescription of adjuvant chemotherapy, poorer survival outcomes were observed in Belgium. No clear linear pattern between the proportion of chemotherapy and better adjusted relative survival was observed.Implications for practiceWith the increasing growth of the older population, clinicians will be treating an increasing number of older patients diagnosed with colon cancer. No clear linear pattern between adjuvant chemotherapy and better adjusted relative survival was observed. Future studies should also include data on surgical quality.

Project description:BackgroundRandomized trials support the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for the treatment of aortic stenosis in high- and intermediate-risk patients, but the generalizability of those results in clinical practice has been challenged.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), particularly in intermediate- and high-risk patients, in a nationally representative real-world cohort.MethodsUsing data from the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry and Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database linked to Medicare administrative claims for follow-up, 9,464 propensity-matched intermediate- and high-risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score ≥3%) U.S. patients who underwent commercial TAVR or SAVR were examined. Death, stroke, and days alive and out of the hospital to 1 year were compared, as well as discharge home, with subgroup analyses by surgical risk, demographics, and comorbidities.ResultsIn a propensity-matched cohort (median age 82 years, 48% women, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score 5.6%), TAVR and SAVR patients experienced no difference in 1-year rates of death (17.3% vs. 17.9%; hazard ratio: 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.83 to 1.04) and stroke (4.2% vs. 3.3%; hazard ratio: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.47), and no difference was observed in the proportion of days alive and out of the hospital to 1 year (rate ratio: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.02). However, TAVR patients were more likely to be discharged home after treatment (69.9% vs. 41.2%; odds ratio: 3.19; 95% CI: 2.84 to 3.58). Results were consistent across most subgroups, including among intermediate- and high-risk patients.ConclusionsAmong unselected intermediate- and high-risk patients, TAVR and SAVR resulted in similar rates of death, stroke, and DAOH to 1 year, but TAVR patients were more likely to be discharged home.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough laparoscopic liver resection has become the standard for minor resections, evidence is lacking for more complex resections such as the right posterior sectionectomy (RPS). We aimed to compare surgical outcomes between laparoscopic (LRPS) and open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS).MethodsAn international multicenter retrospective study comparing patients undergoing LRPS or ORPS (January 2007-December 2018) was performed. Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoint was major complication rate defined as Accordion ≥ 3 grade. Secondary endpoints included blood loss, length of hospital stay (LOS) and resection status. A sensitivity analysis was done excluding the first 10 LRPS patients of each center to correct for the learning curve. Additionally, possible risk factors were explored for operative time, blood loss and LOS.ResultsOverall, 399 patients were included from 9 centers from 6 European countries of which 150 LRPS could be matched to 150 ORPS. LRPS was associated with a shorter operative time [235 (195-285) vs. 247 min (195-315) p = 0.004], less blood loss [260 (188-400) vs. 400 mL (280-550) p = 0.009] and a shorter LOS [5 (4-7) vs. 8 days (6-10), p = 0.002]. Major complication rate [n = 8 (5.3%) vs. n = 9 (6.0%) p = 1.00] and R0 resection rate [144 (96.0%) vs. 141 (94.0%), p = 0.607] did not differ between LRPS and ORPS, respectively. The sensitivity analysis showed similar findings in the previous mentioned outcomes. In multivariable regression analysis blood loss was significantly associated with the open approach, higher ASA classification and malignancy as diagnosis. For LOS this was the open approach and a malignancy.ConclusionThis international multicenter propensity score-matched study showed an advantage in favor of LRPS in selected patients as compared to ORPS in terms of operative time, blood loss and LOS without differences in major complications and R0 resection rate.

Dataset Information

Survival following early-stage colon cancer: an ACCENT-based comparison of patients versus a matched international general population†.

Background

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Survival following early-stage colon cancer: an ACCENT-based comparison of patients versus a matched international general population†.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets